by Kerry Bolton
Nearly two decades later Oppenheimer was explaining: ‘Nationalist politics have made it impossible to make use of Black labour.’[17] Perhaps the good and the righteous should contemplate that, the next time they pontificate about how they ‘marched against apartheid’?
Up until the assassination of South African Prime Minister Dr. Hendrik Verwoerd on 6 September 1966, the Nationalists remained acutely aware of the identity of their real adversaries, Prime Minister Daniel F. Malan stating: ‘What we have against us is money power, principally under the leadership of Oppenheimer.’[18]
Dr. Verwoerd, regarded as the ‘architect of apartheid,’ and a statesman of immense stature who had the respect of Black Africa, provided the philosophical basis for separate development and the defence of the European in Africa.[19] After his assassination in 1966 his successors lacked the ideological coherence and a comprehension of the forces working against them, and adopted a defensive and inadequate—even apologetic—position.
In 1953 even Nelson Mandela stated of the Oppenheimer empire: ‘Rather than attempt the costly, dubious and dangerous task of crushing the non-European mass movements by force, they would seek to divert it with fine words and promises and divide it by giving concessions and bribes to a privileged minority.’[20] Yet when Oppenheimer died in 2000 Mandela eulogised:
‘His contribution to building a partnership between Big Business and the new democratic government in the first period of democratic rule can never be appreciated too much.’[21]
Predictably, Saint Nelson had prostituted himself to plutocracy, and has received the worshipful accolades of the world ever since, his conviction as a key member of a terrorist plot having been put down the memory hole. It was the pattern that was followed all over post-colonial Africa, where a cosmopolitan, oligarchic neo-colonialism, with the backing of the U.S. military, arose over the ruins of the European empires.
Helen Suzman and the Progressive Party
While the Afrikaners fought the ANC and Spear of the Nation terrorists, the Progressive Party assumed the Parliamentary opposition in the political jungle. Founded in 1959 by Helen Suzman, who was its sole MP for 13 years, Oppenheimer became the primary source of funds for the Progressive Party. After the betrayal of the Afrikaners by their compromising leaders, Suzman and her colleagues redirected their efforts to the inauguration of a post-apartheid South Africa that would be opened up to globalism, a direction, as will be seen below, that has from the start been followed by the ANC regime. For this purpose, Suzman et al. established the Helen Suzman Foundation in 1993 to promote ‘liberal democratic values,’[22] a euphemism for globalisation and privatisation.
The character of the ‘liberal democratic’ South Africa for which she worked can be discerned from the Trustees of the Foundation which, like other such think tanks around the world, combine business with academia in refashioning society according to business interests. Among the trustees are: Doug Band, a board director of companies such as Standard Bank Group, and Bidvest Group; Temba Nolutshungu, director of the Free Market Foundation; Krishna Patel, Chief Executive of Global Private Banking; Gary Ralfe, who served for most of his career with the Anglo-American and De Beers corporations; Richard Steyn, currently a director of Editors Inc., and formerly director of corporate affairs and communications at Standard Bank; David Unterhalter, chairman of the Appellate Body of the World Trade Organization.[23] The director of the Foundation is Francis Antonie, who was senior economist at Standard Bank (1996–2006) and founder of Strauss & Co.[24]
The financial patrons of the Foundation include Oppenheimer, Soros, and Rothschild interests. Among them are:
German-based Friedrich Naumann Foundation for Freedom, founded in 1991, focusing on ‘advocating liberal reform concepts that further the democratic and economic development of countries’ in Black Africa, training public officials and political party leaders.[25]
Open Society Foundation for South Africa, founded in 1993 as part of the global revolutionary network of currency speculator George Soros.[26]
Oppenheimer Memorial Trust.
HSBC global investment bank.
Investec ‘specialist bank and asset manager.’
Hollard, insurance and finance.
Webber Wentzel, corporate and commercial law firm.
E. Oppenheimer & Son.
ABSA Bank.
Standard Bank South Africa, an international bank and one of South Africa’s largest. This bank was established in 1862 as a subsidiary of Standard Bank in Britain. In 2002, Standard Bank acquired 90 per cent of Uganda Commercial Bank, the new bank being called Stanbic Bank (Uganda) Limited, Uganda’s largest commercial bank. In 2007 Standard Bank Group acquired controlling interest in IBTC Chartered Bank forming, StanbicIBTC Bank Nigeria Limited. It is indicative of the global economic nexus that now welds power over post-colonial Black Africa. The Standard Bank has particularly close relations with China.
Deloitte, global financial consultants.
N. M. Rothschild & Sons Ltd.[27]
What the ‘Progressives’ fought for, with Big Business backing, was a post-apartheid South Africa which could more readily utilise and create a vast Black labour and consumer market. Again, the mental gymnastics of doublethink are required to enable the anti-apartheid zealot to believe that in opposing the Afrikaner he was ‘fighting capitalism.’
The Long Walk to Slavery [28]
While journalists, politicians, clerics, academics and other mental retards of sundry types worship Mandela as the Risen Christ, even getting tearful when they speak His name, South Africa has descended into a hell on earth.[29]
What has been the result of post-apartheid South Africa? The answer is that the ‘anti-apartheid struggle’ ushered in a regime of privatisation and globalisation on the ruins of the state-directed economic structure that the Afrikaners had created. Far from being exploitive capitalists, whipping old Darkie with the sjambok, as stereotyped by Marxist propaganda and the Western news media, the Afrikaners were an anomaly in the world economy: the last of a traditional European peasantry bonded to faith, blood and land. The industrial structure included the parastatals, corporations fully or partly owned by the state. With the advent of Saint Nelson’s ANC/Communist Party coalition, as one would expect, the ‘comrades’ have set about delivering South Africa to international capitalism. In 1996 Saint Nelson, despite once having supported nationalization, stated: ‘Privatisation is the fundamental policy of the ANC and will remain so.’[30]
ANC economics adviser C. Mostert has detailed the history and ideology of privatisation in South Africa, stating that the Nationalists introduced state supervision of the economy in 1948, a policy which began to be dismantled by the corrupted National Party in 1987, which has been continued by the ANC government.[31] Mostert states that the ANC has embarked on a policy recommended by the International Monetary Fund. He states that the word ‘privatisation’ is not generally used, but rather the phrase ‘restructuring of state assets,’ which is widely associated with privatisation. The Government Communication and Information Service (GCIS) uses the two phrases interchangeably when it describes economic developments and policy.[32]
These privatisation initiatives have taken different forms and include:
The complete sale of companies, like Sun Air and seven radio stations to consortiums;
Build, Operate and Transfer arrangements for the building of roads;
The opening of private-public partnerships at local government level for the provision of services like water;
Selling a partial stake (30 per cent) in Telkom to combined American-Malaysian consortium; and
The proposed sale of a 25–30 per cent stake of South African Airways.
The ANC has stated: ‘Eskom is one of a host of government owned parastatals created during the apartheid era wh
ich the democratically elected government has set out to privatise in a bid to raise money.’[33]
Why does a country that had hitherto been so prosperous now need to raise capital by selling off its assets? The answer lies in South Africa having been quickly reduced to a basket case, a bottomless economic sinkhole, like every other ‘decolonised’ state on the Dark Continent. The plutocrats who pushed for the destruction of so prosperous a nation apparently had a long-term dialectical plan that seemed, in the short-term, to undermine their profitability. In the long term, however, the impoverishment of South Africa by the incompetence that invariably results from ‘majority rule’ has obliged South Africa to become an open economy operating an ongoing garage sale. But so long as South Africa now has universal franchise and has put the redundant Boer in his place, it matters not to most of the useful idiots of the Left who were merely performing their historic role as lickspittles of Money.[34]
In the next several chapters we shall consider the multicultural doctrines of international capitalism that are used to rationalise and intellectualise the creation of a new slave race in the service of a global economic order, a process that apartheid had blocked.
[1] Chomsky, Understanding Power, op. loc.
[2] Pallister et al., 98.
[3] Bolton, Revolution from Above.
[4] J. A. Hobson, The War in South Africa: Its Causes and Effects (London: Nisbet, 1900), 66–70; cited by Stephen Mitford Goodson, General Jan Christian Smuts: The Debunking of a Myth (Pretoria: Bienedell Uitgewers, 2012), 8.
[5] Hobson, The War in South Africa, 197.
[6] Goodson, General Jan Christian Smuts, 8.
[7] Ibid., 10.
[8] John Jewell, ‘White Revolt on the Rand 1922,’ in A Salute to Dr Hendrik Verwoerd & the Boer Folk, ed. K. R. Bolton (Paraparaumu Beach, New Zealand: Renaissance Press, n.d.), 6–10.
[9] Ibid., 9–10.
[10] ‘Max Hoggenheimer’ was invented circa 1906 as a character by the South African cartoonist and arts patron Daniël Cornelis Boonzaier as the archetypal Rand magnate, often featured in Boonzaier’s cartoons.
[11] C. Hirshfield, ‘The British Left and the “Jewish Conspiracy”: A Case Study of Modern Antisemitism,’ Jewish Social Studies 43, no. 2 (Spring 1981), 105–7.
[12] Ibid.
[13] Ibid., 13, 23.
[14] David Pallister, Sarah Stewart, and Ian Lepper, South Africa Inc.: The Oppenheimer Empire (London: Corgi Books, 1988), 78–80.
[15] Ibid., p. 91.
[16] H. F. Oppenheimer, Africa South (1960), cited by Ivor Benson, Behind Communism in Africa (Pinetown, South Africa: Dolphin Press, 1975), 14.
[17] Harry F. Oppenheimer interviewed by Brian Hackland, Johannesburg, 30 October 1978, cited in Pallister et al., 87.
[18] Pallister et al., 80.
[19] For example, read: H. F. Verwoerd, ‘The Rights of the White Man in Africa,’ Parliamentary speech, 9 March 1960, reprinted in A Salute to Dr Hendrik Verwoerd & the Boer Folk, 18–24.
[20] N. R. Mandela, ‘The Shifting Sands of Illusion,’ Liberation, June 1953, http://www.africawithin.com/mandela/shifting_sands_0653.htm.
[21] N. R. Mandela, ‘Eulogy: Harry Oppenheimer,’ 4 September 2000, Time, http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,997869,00.html.
[22] Helen Suzman Foundation, ‘What We Do,’ http://www.hsf.org.za/what-we-do/what-we-do.
[23] Helen Suzman Foundation, ‘Trustees,’ http://www.hsf.org.za/about-us/trustees.
[24] Helen Suzman Foundation, ‘Staff,’ http://www.hsf.org.za/about-us/staff.
[25] Friedrich Naumann Foundation for Freedom, http://www.africa.fnst-freiheit.org/overview/.
[26] Open Society Foundation of South Africa, http://osf.org.za/.
[27] Helen Suzman Foundation, Donors, http://www.hsf.org.za/about-us/partners.
[28] Paraphrasing Mandela’s autobiography, The Long Walk to Freedom.
[29] See for example: ‘Why we are White Refugees,’ http://why-we-are-white-refugees.blogspot.co.nz/.
[30] N. R. Mandela, Financial Mail, 7 June 1996. Cited by Clive Barnett, “The Limits of Media Democratisation in South Africa: Politics, Privatisation and Regulation,” Media, Culture & Society (London: Sage Publications), 655, http://rcirib.ir/articles/pdfs/cd1%5CIngenta_Sage_Articles_on_194_225_11_89/Ingenta751.pdf.
[31] C. Mostert, ‘Economic Policy Co-Coordinator for the Economic Transformation Committee of the NEC of the African National Congress,’ Reflections on South Africa’s Restructuring of State-Owned Enterprises, Occasional Papers No. 5 (Johannesburg: Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, March 2002), http://library.fes.de/pdf-files/bueros/suedafrika/07164.pdf Ibid., p. 13.
[32] Ibid., 18.
[33] ANC Daily News Briefing, June 27, 2001.
[34] For the historical alliance between Marxism and capitalism, see Bolton, Revolution from Above, inter alia.
‘One World, One Race’
Our species is an African one . . .
—The Geographic Project[1]
While atheists and agnostics ridicule the Biblical story of Adam and Eve, which is normally interpreted as meaning a common ancestor-couple for all humanity, we are simultaneously asked to believe in a Darwinian version. Indeed, the scientific literature often refers to the ‘African Eve.’ This common human origin is then used for propagandistic purposes to promote internationalism, multiculturalism, and the idea of ‘one world, one race.’
In 2008, 60 Minutes ran a story on Spenser Wells, Explorer in Residence for the National Geographic Society, who is mapping the genetic linkages of the world population. The media are naturally eager to promote Wells’ genetic mapping because it supports the ‘Out of Africa’ or ‘African Eve’ hypothesis. The liberal Establishment is eager to proclaim that we are all part of a nebulous mass of humanity without any differences other than what can be learned. The interviewer, a blond woman, was pleased to state that she was ‘once an African’ (sic). It is symptomatic of those Europeans who yearn to be anything other than what they are—Europeans—and are oblivious to their own heritage, yearning for the exotic, like the 18th-century literati and their debased wealthy patrons and matrons who enthused and were titillated by the theoretical construct of the ‘Noble Savage’ dwelling in peaceful communistic utopias in the South Seas, Africa, and the Americas.[2] Our ‘moderns’ and ‘progressives’ of today are no different from their ignorant ideological forebears of several centuries ago.
Hence multiculturalism has become a cult, and is lauded as the wave of the future by those who have no appreciation for the past, and exploited by those who see it as a means of obliterating barriers to global profit maximization and political control.
In 1992 Wilson and Cann proposed the ‘Out of Africa’ hypothesis of human migrations 200,000 years ago.[3] While this ‘Out of Africa’ is the new orthodoxy, contrary evidence is ignored by the popular media. Those geneticists advocating the ‘African Eve’ hypothesis are not in agreement with another branch of science—paleoanthropology, the examination of fossil remains. On the basis of the fossil remains paleoanthropologists maintain that there is a wide divergence of humanity going well back prior to the mere 200,000 years ascribed to different populations by the ‘African Eve’ protagonists. Human divergence occurred one to two million years ago, when the features that today mark Europeans, Australian Aborigines, Chinese, et al. were already present.
Multi-Regional Evolution
What paleoanthropologists now call ‘multiregional evolution’ on the other hand postulates divergence far beyond that time. Alan G. Thorne and Milford H. Wolpoff maintain the
polygenic or multiregional basis of modern human origins. They state that there is no single recent dispersal for modern humans, that humans originated in Africa and then slowly developed their modern forms in every area of the Old World. Therefore stating that all humanoids originated in Africa means very little, but gives the false impression that all of humanity is an undifferentiated African globule.
According to the multiregional view, mitochondrial DNA is not our only source of evidence. Fossil remains and artefacts represent more reliable evidence. Multiregional evolution traces all populations to humans first leaving Africa 1.8 million years ago. Distinctive populations have maintained physical differences. The features that distinguish Asians, Australian Aborigines, and Europeans are said to have evolved over a long period where these peoples are found today. The hominid fossils from Australasia show a continuous anatomic sequence, with the earliest Australians displaying features seen in Indonesia 100,000 years ago. Similar evidence is seen in northern Asia where one million year old Chinese fossils differ from Javanese fossils in ways that parallel the differences between north Asians and Australians today.[4]
